Is Strava a useful reflection of ability?

barrybridges

I've recently signed up to Strava, although to be honest I'm not sure what all the fuss is about.

What I'm interested in is whether Strava is a useful gauge of real-life ability vs other riders. This is a genuine question; I'm not looking to show off!

Since joining, I find that I can comfortably get into the top 20% on most of the harder Surrey climbs in this area. I've even got KOM on a very local climb near me.

I was quite surprised by this, because I'm slightly overweight, don't do much training and would very much consider myself at the lower end of ability when it comes to riding a bike fast.

Granted, I've been doing a lot of training since January to try and change this, but I thought it's easier to ask here:

Am I right in thinking that being high on a leaderboard in Strava really means absolutely nothing when it comes to real-world ability? And that at the moment there's not enough critical mass using Strava for it be a useful peer-to-peer comparison tool?

OR, actually, can you glean anything from your position on Strava?

BigLee1

I use it and find it a bit of fun, getting a better position on the leaderboard, a new PR on a section etc. It`s bound to help re. training if you can measure your goals but I suspect some cheat to get a KOM so sadly some are impossible to beat.
Just enjoy using it but don`t read too much into it

mr_poll

Just depends how often a segment has been ridden and by how many people (that info is shown) - I have a training loop that I am KOM of, however 5 ppl have ridden it. On a popular sportive on a very popular climb I am about 330th out of 1400 people.

As BigLee says I use it as a bit fun and more as a personal test of my ability, it motivates me to try and beat my own times. Also as I ride with a club I look how I performed with people I think are close to my ability rather than look at the racing guys who are 15 years my junior and 2 stone lighter.

Anything that gets me out and motivates me to push myself gets my vote, hence why I am a self confessed strava addict.

phreak

I'd say it's purely a bit of fun. Don't worry about what other people are up to. As long as you're getting better that's surely the main thing?

supergrass

I’m totally addicted, but just for competing against myself, I like to attack the segment and beat my own times. The only thing I’m not sure about is how accurate the GPS is.. There is a hill near me which I did in 4 min’s last year using my Samsung galaxy s 2 as a GPS I, treated myself to a Garmin 500 and the same hill I’m now 35 seconds slower on. I find it hard to believe im that much slower as My all round fitness is higher this year so I wouldn’t expect to be so far off the pace… OR maybe age is catching up on me and I’m looking for an excuse :?

mr_poll

supergrass wrote:

I’m totally addicted, but just for competing against myself, I like to attack the segment and beat my own times. The only thing I’m not sure about is how accurate the GPS is.. There is a hill near me which I did in 4 min’s last year using my Samsung galaxy s 2 as a GPS I, treated myself to a Garmin 500 and the same hill I’m now 35 seconds slower on. I find it hard to believe im that much slower as My all round fitness is higher this year so I wouldn’t expect to be so far off the pace… OR maybe age is catching up on me and I’m looking for an excuse :?

GPS's can differ but generally by up to about 6-8 seconds, all depends how often it gets a signal from and how many satellites it pulls from. 35 seconds is a significant margin however dont rule out the wind, I have a hill where I set my record with a tailwind, I know I am fitter and now have a lighter, better bike and I can still get no where near my time.

okgo

Some of the most popular segments are the best to gauge yourself on I'd say, Box Hill has over 8000 times on it, the top 20% would mean you were doing it around 6 mins, which is decent.

However some of the other climbs in Surrey are much less popular so being in the top 20% of those would not be a good indicator. So best bet is to find a popular one and see where you place, Box Hill is a good one, also Whitedown if you're more into steeper stuff?

Assuming I've found you on there, then your best time up Titsey Hill is over 2 mins down on the KOM , so I would say not to think too much into it as that isn't really a popular segment compared to Box Hill for example.

imposter2.0

barrybridges wrote:

Am I right in thinking that being high on a leaderboard in Strava really means absolutely nothing when it comes to real-world ability? And that at the moment there's not enough critical mass using Strava for it be a useful peer-to-peer comparison tool?

For a reality check, try entering one of the many local criteriums or handicap road races which are on regularly in your area.

davidof

If only my local segments were so easy. I've got pro and semi-pro riders training left right and center and generally languish around the median point on most rides. The only segment were I'm in the top 10% is a very fast descent - probably because I way nearly twice as much as the pros :-).

barrybridges

okgo wrote:

Assuming I've found you on there, then your best time up Titsey Hill is over 2 mins down on the KOM , so I would say not to think too much into it as that isn't really a popular segment compared to Box Hill for example.

I suppose that's my point. If you ignore Box Hill for a moment, Titsey Hill is a pretty popular climb in this neck of the woods. If I'm 2 minutes down on KOM and can still get into the top 100 (or top 3rd) then it suggests that it's not that useful.

What I'm trying to get at is that longer-term, Strava could be really useful if you could compare/contrast performance against people who are at a known-level.

In other words, comparing leaderboards based on ranking, RR category etc, would give some people confidence and show them where they need to improve.

For me, as a relatively novice/luddite who is looking to ride the Marmotte and hopefully post a time which isn't embarrassing, I'd find it really reassuring to know that I can climb as well as others who have previously completed the marmotte successfully.

I know it's all vanity-metrics stuff, but that's where Strava could be really useful.

okgo

barrybridges wrote:

okgo wrote:

Assuming I've found you on there, then your best time up Titsey Hill is over 2 mins down on the KOM , so I would say not to think too much into it as that isn't really a popular segment compared to Box Hill for example.

I suppose that's my point. If you ignore Box Hill for a moment, Titsey Hill is a pretty popular climb in this neck of the woods. If I'm 2 minutes down on KOM and can still get into the top 100 (or top 3rd) then it suggests that it's not that useful.

What I'm trying to get at is that longer-term, Strava could be really useful if you could compare/contrast performance against people who are at a known-level.

In other words, comparing leaderboards based on ranking, RR category etc, would give some people confidence and show them where they need to improve.

For me, as a relatively novice/luddite who is looking to ride the Marmotte and hopefully post a time which isn't embarrassing, I'd find it really reassuring to know that I can climb as well as others who have previously completed the marmotte successfully.

I know it's all vanity-metrics stuff, but that's where Strava could be really useful.

Well I suppose for us in clubs, or in the racing scene in the area it is useful because we know who the people at the sharp end are. The KOM on that hill for instance I speak to every now and again, he's a great rider, having a quick look down I recognize around 6 or 7 names in the top 20 that range from decent Cat 2 racers, very good time trialers, and even a fairly regular club rider in the mix on that hill. So I suppose it is useful if you know what you're looking at.

Of course its really only useful if you know the people, for instance KOM's watts for that climb are good, but its not until you learn he weighs 68kg that you realise how good. But you can filter by age, weight etc, but yes, I agree perhaps racing category would be a good additional filter, or marmotte time or something like that.

imposter2.0

Does strava take into account the 70 or so miles which may have been ridden before you hit a particular segment ? That usually explains why you sometimes have 'professional segment grabbers' at the top of the leaderboards and quality racers somewhere down in the middle...

davidof

> Does strava take into account the 70 or so miles
or the guy who waits for a strong wind from the right direction for example

I really just use Strava for myself. I'm never going to be KoM on any route but where say, a 1000m climb is broken into segments I can focus on times for climbing the hill at a more even tempo rather than going fast early on and blowing in the final third of the climb.

barrybridges

Imposter wrote:

Does strava take into account the 70 or so miles which may have been ridden before you hit a particular segment ? That usually explains why you sometimes have 'professional segment grabbers' at the top of the leaderboards and quality racers somewhere down in the middle...

No, I don't think it does, but it would be a useful feature. Some kind of 'miles before the segment' filter that you could apply.

What I find infuriating about Strava - as someone just getting used to it - is that the segments on the mobile app and the desktop website don't always match up (when you're trying to find a segement).

Recently, I wanted to test myself on Crockham Hill which is a local route. I looked on the website and saw the start and finish segements, then went out and incorporated it into my usual ride.

When I got home, the mobile app said that the start and finish points were different, so I'd eased back 100m before the top of the climb; and hadn't put my foot down until 100m into the segment.

Going back to the topic, the ability to compare is exactly what I'd really appreciate. Having the confidence in your training is one thing, but knowing your relative ability is really useful.

Knowing that I'm in the top 20% of club riders up Titsey Hill is a great confidence boost, but if actually I'm in the bottom 20% - and that most of the Strava users have ridden up it on a Halfords Apollo with toe straps - renders the comparitive useless.

okgo

The segments are not different, more likely your phone is a poor GPS device.

If you want to KNOW then go and race or do a time trial, all will be revealed, its a bit of software, it does a job, the people at the top of segments tend to be better riders than those that are not, pretty simple.

Titsey Hill - yes you're in the top 20% of a segment that isn't that popular, some of the people at the top are very good riders, some of the riders at the bottom will be no hopers on crap bikes, some people will have only ridden it once and not put in much effort - I think you are expecting too much from what is meant to be a fairly basic tool that is a bit of fun...

The only way to know if you're any good is to go and race, or ideally do a time trial where the only factor is you.

bigmonka

I really like using Strava to track my rides and check my average speed etc. But my use of it means that there are some segments that I pootle through or don't know that they exist until I get home. So although the people at the top of the segment leaderboard have probably put a load of effort in, the ones at the bottom were most probably not. So comparing your time with those at the top could be useful, but I wouldn't bother looking at the bigger picture of where you stand out of everyone who's ridden the segment.

jibberjim

No, the only way to "know" is not to race, there are plenty of very good riders who don't ride 4th cat races let alone anything higher. The fastest guy up Box Hill has never ridden a 4th cat race or anything higher I believe for example. None of the local "2nd cats" can come close to his time though.

This highlights the silliness of the question itself, there's always better people, doing more specific things, you can only compete against the guys who enter, be that strava, a race, a time trial or anything else. Entering a 4th cat race won't tell you much at all, other than about your nerves and your sprint - Box Hill time and 4th cat success are not very highly correlated at all, and 4th cat success and Alp D'huez time even less. A time trial might tell you a little more, but only against other people who turn up, and with similar equipment (aerodynamics which is an exercise in body shape and intelligence matters a lot) And a hill climb even more (with aerodynamics being somewhat removed) however it'll still only let you measure against the people who turn up.

More people "turn up" to strava than anything else, so feel free to compare yourself, but it's not representative of the whole cycling fraternity, pick targets appropriate to yourself, and reach those, don't try and compare yourself to everyone, set realistic goals and try and achieve them.

aw1808

I'm an average cyclist based on the rides I ride with and also the club runs I go on , I'm not the slowest but far from the quickest.

I use strava as a personal challenge and I like too see it as personal progress more than a competitive thing . There are quite a lot of segments where I live and I'm always going through several segments.

You can use it as you choose too but surely it's a bit of fun and its all about your own development as a cyclist to what your aming to do . It can be useful if you ride regularly to monitor your own progress.

bernithebiker

There are so many factors at play, that it's hard to accurately compare to other riders;

1. Wind
2. Group or not?
3. Total ride distance
4. Quality of the riders in your area.

As a rough guide for a 2km hill, top times in our area are;

2% - 35km/h
3% - 33km/h
4% - 30km/h
5% - 28km/h
6% - 25km/h

Mettan

barrybridges wrote:

What I'm interested in is whether Strava is a useful gauge of real-life ability vs other riders.

A better gauge might be to do a series of Open 25's throughout the season and see how you do - in some respects, a 25 mile TT provides a perfect window into how you are performing and improving as a rider.

Tom Butcher

I think Jim has it right - choose targets appropriate to you. Personally i dont aspire to be a good time triallist so i wouldn't aim at a series of 25s - others might.

The only thing with Strava is as everyone has pointed out its not comparing like with like - the vast majority of times on any segment were set by people who had no idea they were on a strava segment and were probably just tootling along. My best kom was set on a chaingang - its not really down to me any more than the rest of the lads in the group. That said as its got popular most known climbs and descents have some decent times on them and plenty of people will have targetted them so if it provides a bit of fun and motivation to try and move up the leaderboard then no harm in having that as a target.

slunker

We have a few strava baggers in our area and that there sole purpose is to go out and get KOM's and fastest segments. They usually head out when other cyclists wouldn't i.e 40 mph winds but get a segment where that wind is a tailwind for them, hey then post it up and think their mountain goats!!

Usually you look at the rest of the ride they have done and it's 14mph average, if that.

okgo

Some people have an ability to go very fast up a hill but little else, and I know a few people who go out and only ride the hills hard as that is what they like to do, nowt wrong with that. Especially if they are specialists in HC events.

Mettan

okgo wrote:

or ideally do a time trial where the only factor is you.

+1 agreed - nose in the wind, nowhere to sit in - 'typical' riding terrain - (Spoco's in particular provide a decent mix)

okgo

Though as Jim says, aero kit, time trial bikes etc will skew things. BUT it will give you a an idea. Look on strava to look at the times for that TT segment, then see how you go!

philbar72

I've used it as a training tool and what it does show me is I can generate nearl 1/3 more power over an hour or 5 than when I started recording in October last year. It shows that I'm getting fitter and faster, though if I'm 70. Miles into a ride, I may not be able to get up a hill quite as quick as I would if I were 45 minutes into the ride.

Churchill123

Imposter wrote:

Does strava take into account the 70 or so miles which may have been ridden before you hit a particular segment ? That usually explains why you sometimes have 'professional segment grabbers' at the top of the leaderboards and quality racers somewhere down in the middle...

I know know some people who will ride 2 miles to smash a KOM and then ride home

barrybridges

Churchill123 wrote:

Imposter wrote:

Does strava take into account the 70 or so miles which may have been ridden before you hit a particular segment ? That usually explains why you sometimes have 'professional segment grabbers' at the top of the leaderboards and quality racers somewhere down in the middle...

I know know some people who will ride 2 miles to smash a KOM and then ride home

I couldn't do that - it normally takes me an hour just to get warm (not that I actually set any KOM at that point; I'm normally languishing near the tailend).

bigmonka

madasahattersley wrote:

Personally I just upload all of my training files and racked up 100+ KOMs just from 2 years of riding around quickly :-)

Fixed that for you

markhewitt1978

Imposter wrote:

Does strava take into account the 70 or so miles which may have been ridden before you hit a particular segment ? That usually explains why you sometimes have 'professional segment grabbers' at the top of the leaderboards and quality racers somewhere down in the middle...

Of course not, there's a segment near me (on I created in fact!) that if you approach from the downhill direction you'll be basically doing it from a standing start. But if you approach from uphill you'll be doing 20mph as you cross the start line.

Gav888

Strava is only useful for having a laugh with mates, but it can be used as a training tool for yourself to compare against yourself... no one else.

As per the comments before, people will ride easy then go mental on a segment to get the best time, it isnt a good reflection of someones overall fitness, you could have a begineer averaging 12mph for example over a few hours, but they hammers Strava sections with the best of them...

Also, with websites like http://www.digitalepo.com/ boosting peoples rides its pointless.